Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:43:53.936Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Letter From Šamaš-Šumu-Ukīn to Esarhaddon

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2014

Simo Parpola
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

BM 135586 = 1971–7–5, 1, until recently in private possession, is a hitherto unknown Neo-Assyrian letter belonging to the royal correspondence of Nineveh, and indisputably an important specimen of its genre. In 39 completely preserved lines, it contains a message to the Assyrian king Esarhaddon (680–669 B.C.) from his son Šamaš-šumu-ukīn, who at that time was the crown prince of Babylon. So far only three very short and fragmentary letters sent by Šamaš-šumu-ukīn in this office had been known, and they are now completely overshadowed by the new text, which is here published by permission of the Trustees of the British Museum. It is of dark grey-brown colour and measures 41 by 82 mm. For all further details concerning the tablet and the script I refer to the photographs and copy published on Plate XIX.

Type
Research Article
Information
IRAQ , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , Spring 1972 , pp. 21 - 34
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute for the Study of Iraq 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Published in cuneiform type by Harper, R. F., Assyrian and Babylonian Letters (14 Vols.), London and Chicago, 1892–1914Google Scholar; for translations and studies see Borger, R., Handbuch der Keilschriftliteratur I (Berlin, 1967), p. 176 ffGoogle Scholar. See also Parpola, S., AOAT 5/1, p. vii fGoogle Scholar.

2 ABL 534: 1a-na LUGAL be-lí-ia 2 ìR-ka I.dGIŠNU-MU-GI.NA 3lu-u šùl-mu a-na LUGAL EN-ia dPA dAMAR + UD a-na LUGAL 5 be-lí-ia lik-ru-bu 6 I-en ANŠE.KUR.RA 7Ša kurra-ṣa-pa-a-a 8 I-en udukab-su 9ša I.dPA-DÙ-PABmeš (1–5: same introductory formula as in our letter. 6–9: “I horse of the Rezephite(s), I young ram of Nabû-bāni-aḫḫē.”).

ABL 535: 1a-na [LUGAL b]e-lí-iá 2 ÌR-k[a I.dGIŠ].ŠIR-MU-GI.NA 3lu šùl-[mu a-na LUGAL] EN-iá 4 [dAG ù dAMA]R + UD 5 [a-na LUGAL EN-iá lik]-ru-bu 6[…..]X ki ri (fragments of the same introductory formula as in our letter).

ABL 536: 1 [a-n]a LUGAL be-lí-[ia] 2 [ÌR]-ka I.dGIŠ.NU-MU-[GI.NA] 3 [lu-u] šùl-mu a-na LUGAL b[e-lí-ia] 4 dAG u dAMAR + UD a-[na LUGAL be-l]í-i[a] 5lik-ru-bu DINGIRmeš D[Ù-šú-nu] 6ḫi-is-su-tú ša [… .] 7a-na SIG5ša a-[…] 8li-iḫ-su-su [. .] Rev. 1ḫi-is-su-tú […. ] 2lìb-bi x[….] (blank space, then in Babylonian script): 3 [.] 30 [….] 4 [.] lìb-bi […] 5 [lid]-di-nu […].

3 I want to thank cordially Dr. E. Sollberger, Deputy Keeper of the Department of Western Asiatic Antiquities who, besides communicating the tablet to me and giving me permission to publish it, provided the photographs and lent me his draft transliteration of the text. In addition, he collated the tablet for me and made several important critical remarks to my preliminary transliteration and translation.

4 This phenomenon has been interpreted in two different ways (see von Soden, W., JCS 2 (1948), 301 f.Google Scholar, and GAG § 15 f.; and W. Mayer, loc. cit.), neither of which seems quite satisfactory. The change is clearly marked by stress, since e.g. plural forms like idággulū are never affected by it (unless the ending is stressed for some reason). The quality and quantity of the variable vowel cannot be defined with certainty.

5 See Deller, K., “Studien zur neuassyrischen Orthographie”, Or NS 31 (1960), 186 ff.Google Scholar, with discussion of the problem.

6 My inclination toward a phonetical interpretation in this particular case does by no means mean that I deny the existence of “inverse spellings” in principle. There are unambiguous examples, collected by Deller in the article just mentioned, which prove that confusion in the usage of signs indeed existed, probably under the influence of Aramaic script. However, it is not advisable to interpret all spellings deviating from a grammatical model after orthographical principles: such a procedure would annul the possibilities of a deeper understanding of Neo-Assyrian phonetics and, in particular, the reconstruction of the various subdialects within the language. Moreover, it should be borne in mind that there are no orthographical principles which could be universally applied to all Neo-Assyrian texts. There were several scribal schools, and each scribe had more or less his own conventions.

7 The shortening of phonemically long unstressed final vowels is paralleled by modern Arabic dialects. Cf., e.g., Palva, H., Lower Galilean Arabic (StOr 32, Helsinki, 1965), p. 10Google Scholar.

8 The circumstances under which this could happen remain to be studied. Note that “in Syriac final vowels, whether long or short, are dropped (*qábarū > *qábar [the final ū is written but not pronounced])” (Moscati, S., An Introduction to the Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Languages, p. 68Google Scholar).

9 These are of the type i-da-gul, i.e. the last syllable is written with a CVC-sign. Such spellings are considered inexplicit with regard to the vowels (cf. Deller, K., Or NS 31 (1960), 7 ff.Google Scholar; and Gelb, , Or NS 39 (1968), 536)Google Scholar and hence of little significance to the present problem, but I think the matter is just the other way round. If a word as a result of the dropping of the final vowel ended up in a closed syllable, what would have been more natural than to write this syllable with a convenient CVC-sign? The spellings e-pu-uš, tu-up-pa-áš, etc., are only seemingly “explicit”: that we do not have CVC-spellings here results solely from the fact that no suitable signs existed in the Neo-Assyrian syllabary.

10 Cf., e.g., ABL 1046: 9–12 di-ib-bi DÙG + GAmešis-se-šú-nu du-ub-bu ka-a-a-ma-nu di-ib-bi DÙG + GAmešis-se-e-šú-nu a - d a - b u - u b.

11 The problem is obviously connected with stress. The pattern pursu could be considered an alloform of purus, provoked by the heavy stress falling on the first syllable, which alternatively would have caused a lengthening of the vowel. Note that the phenomenon is not restricted to the imperative only: we have, e.g., the following stative pairs:

za-ar-pi, ADD 335: 14

šá-al-mì, LAS 223 r. 14′

maḫ-ri, ABL 211: 16

qur-bu, LAS 148 r.8

ba-al-ṭa, ABL 144 r. 3

da-a'-na, LAS 109: 17′

ma-a'-da, ABL 157 r. 8

za-rip, ADD 1168: 8.

*šalim (written DI-mu).

ma-ḫi-ir, ABL 391: 18.

qu-ru-ub, LAS 312 r. 22′

ba-la-aṭ-u-ni, LAS 13 r. 24

da-an, ABL 479 r. 2

ma-'a-ad, LAS 318: 12

(the list of references could easily be prolonged).

12 It is for this reason that the Sumerian scribes repeated the last root consonant in writing vocalic suffixes (dingir-ra, not *dingir-a) and that the Old Babylonian scribes wrote i-din-nam (instead of *i-din-am) while adding the ventive suffix -am to the indicative form -din. “Morphemic” spellings, (like tak-lim-tú, pl. tak-lim-a-ti) of course also occurs but they form a clear minority. Thus we have in our letter only iṣ-bat-ú-ni 1. 27.

13 For ṭupšar-Enūma-Anu-Enlil = “astrologer” see most recently Parpola, S., AOAT 5/2, p. 12Google Scholar.

14 By assuming a casus pendens, one could translate “the astrologers of Bēl-ēṭer and Šamaš-zēra-iqīša look …”. For such a construction, cf. ABL 403: 14–15, um-ma MÍ ḫa-ṭi-tú ina KÁ É lúDI.KUD 15 KA-šá al-la šá DAM-šá KALAG-an “the words of the adulteress carry more weight at the door of the judge's house than those of her husband”.

15 Taken from a sample of 667 Neo-Assyrian letters comprising 29,843 words in all.

16 For more examples see Deller, K., Or NS 31 (1960), 7 ff.Google Scholar, sub NUMUN, KUN, LUḪ, GAM, ḪAR, GUL, ZUR and LUM.

17 The sign has been collated by Sollberger, however, with a negative result (“the queried sign is certainly IŠ but the emendation to ša is legitimate …”).

18 See AOAT 5/2, notes on LAS 1.

19 See Schott, A. and Schaumberger, J., ZA 47 (1941–1942), 130CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 See LAS 283–286 and, for the dating of these letters, the relevant comments in AOAT 5/2.

21 See ADD 625 = AR 116 (a deed between the governor of Lahiru and a eunuch of the crown prince of Babylon, dated 670), and LAS 280–281 (both dating from 670).

22 See the commentary on LAS 246 in AOAT 5/2, where the pertinent evidence is collected and discussed.

23 C. 15 km south of Babylon.

24 Probably from Babylon, to judge from the domiciles of the informers and the mission of Aplāyu.

25 Published by Thompson, R. C., The Reports of the Magicians and Astrologers of Nineveh and Babylon (2 Vols.), London, 1900Google Scholar. Cf. Oppenheim, A. L., Centaurus 14 (1969), 97 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 My sources are Tallqvist, K., Assyrian Personal Names (1914)Google Scholar and Neubabylonisches Namenbuch (1905); Nicolò, M. San, Babylonische Rechtsurkunden des ausgehenden 8. und 7. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. (1951)Google Scholar; the Ninevite royal correspondence in its entirety (see L. Waterman, RCAE IV index), supplemented by the new texts presented by Dietrich (see the indexes in WO 5 (1969), 51 ff.Google Scholar, and AOAT 7), and my own transliterations of unpublished Assyrian letters; and the letters and records from Calah, published or communicated in Iraq 12 ff.

27 For Neo-Babylonian texts see Tallqvist, K., NN, p. 200bGoogle Scholar (written Išá-rid and Išá-ri-du). The etymology of the name is uncertain. Most probably it is an abbreviation of the PN Ašarīdu (see CAD A 2, 417; cf. ašarissu > šarissu, ibid. 419), but a derivate from the verb *šrd (which to my knowledge is not yet attested in Akkadian) cannot be totally excluded (cf. Hebr. śārîd “survivor”).

28 Assigned hesitatingly to the reign of Sennacherib by Dietrich, M., AOAT 7, p. 16Google Scholar.

29 The name was probably pronounced Nabû-aḫ-ēreš in both cases, whether written with the plural sign or not. Cf. I.dPA-PAP-KAM-eš lúGAR.KUR urusa-am-al-la, ADD 59 r. 5 = I.dPA-PAPmeš-APIN-eš GAR urusa-ma-al-la, ADD 127: 7.

30 See Dietrich, M., WO 4 (1968), 242Google Scholar, and AOAT 7, p. 66 (from Bēl-ušēzib).

31 See Dietrich, M., WO 4 (1968), 242115 and 250Google Scholar.

32 ABL 212 dates from the reign of Sargon II; ADD 30, 59, 127, 231, 269, 277, 279, 635, III R 1, v 43 and PSBA 30 (1908), 111–112Google Scholar a refer to the eponym of 681 B.C.

33 Cf. APN, p. 58, and Dietrich, M., AOAT 7, p. 43Google Scholar.

34 For Neo-Babylonian texts, see Tallqvist, K., NN, p. 196bGoogle Scholar.

35 Mention is made in this letter of Tammarītu II, the Assyrian troop commander Marduk-šarru-uṣur, and Kudurru of Ur, but it is so fragmentary that any date between 648 and 650 seems possible.

36 For a list of different Bēl-ēṭers see Dietrich, M., AOAT 7, p. 321Google Scholar. Provided that the hypothesis of Bēl-ēṭers's being a Babylonian astrologer is incorrect (cf. note on 1. 24 with n. 14), which is very unlikely, two well-known persons from Esarhaddon's reign could be considered: Bēl-ēṭers, the commandant of Uruk (see ABL 276, 299, 1154 + 1363, 1155, 1230, K.4670+, 80–7–19, 113 and 80–7–19, 362) and Bēl-ēṭers, the governor of the city of uruḪARki (see ABL 1345 +, K.1353 and 81–2–4, 70: the reading and identity of uruḪAR is as yet unclear; I consider Dietrich's Ḫarran excluded on the ground of the textual contexts, especially ABL 1453).

37 CT 34, Pl. 50.

38 That an astrologer may have appeared as a judge is not unthinkable, since professional judges were at all times extremely rare. See the evidence collected in CAD D, 28 ff.

39 See RMA 46, 79A, 86A, 120, 132, 190A, 197, 211, 253A, 265, 277M and O. For other persons mentioned in letters and perhaps identical with our Aplāyu, see ABL 324: 2, 413 r. 5, 912 r. 8, 948: 2, 1357: 4Google Scholar and LAS 224 r. 16′.

40 The transcription of the GN Aššūr with a long u (instead of the conventional Aššur) is based on the Hebrew and Aramaic plene writing 'šwr (Genesis 2: 14, 10: 11.22, 25: 18, Isaiah 7: 18, 8: 7, 10: 5, 14:25, etc., and KAI 215:7.11.12.13.15.16.17, 220: 3(?), 233: I6(?).17(?).18) which predominates over the spellings 'šr (I Kings 5:6, KAI 24:8, 215: 18, 222 A 25) and 'sr (passim in names). Note also the Greek writing 'Ασσωρός (Damascius, De primis principiis, ch. 125). The cuneiform spellings (a-šur, a-šùr, a-šu-ur, aš + šur, śš-šu-ri, AN.ŠÁR, A.USUR, etc.) tell nothing about the quantity of the vowel; nevertheless, they prove the etymological identity of the god Aššūr and the land Assyria (= māt Aššūr “land of Aššūr”) thereby showing that Jensen (ZA 1 (1886), 6 ff.Google Scholar) was wrong in trying to establish two Aššur's with different vowel lengths. A totally different question, of course, is whether the long vowel was occasionally shortened in practice, as in names, but that should not affect the transcription which ought to be concerned with phonemic, not phonetic lengths.

41 See ABL 113–116, 427, 494–495, 606, 668, 971 (!), 1094, 1133, 1147 and K.7419. Cf. also ABL 177, 498 and 531, mentioning Urad-Nabû.

42 Other persons with the same name are found in legal documents from Nineveh (IÌR-dPA še-lap-pa-a-a, ADD 38 r. 6; lúA.ZU, 349 r. 15; lúGAL ki-ṣir A.MAN, 857 iv 7) and Calah (ND 2308: 34, 2318: 14, 3422: 30, etc.), but these are of a considerably later date. In Babylonia the name was very common: see Tallqvist, K., NN, p. 14Google Scholar.

43 Urad-Nabû himself mentions an abarakku in ABL 114 (“the gold that the abarakku, the palace scribe and I had inspected together in the month Tašrītu …” Obv. 14 ff.). For the functions of this official see CAD A/1, 35.

44 Cf. n. 24.

45 Published by Wiseman, D. J., “The Vassal-Treaties of Esarhaddon”, Iraq 20 (1958)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Pt. I (also available as a monograph, London, 1958). The purpose of the treaty is stated in the colophon (ll. 669′ ff.) which reads: “The treaty concerning Assurbanipal, official crown-prince of Assyria, and Šamaš-šumu-ukīn, official crown prince of Babylonia, was concluded on Ayaru 16, eponym year of Nabû-bēlu-uṣur, governor of Dūr-Šarrukku.”

46 See ll. 73–82, 108–122, 130–135, 147–149, etc.

47 ll. 349–352.

48 “The Eyes of the Lord”, JAOS 88 (1968), 173 ffGoogle Scholar.

49 Those who broke the agreement were “caught” by it. Cf. LAS 247: 20 ff.: “Aššūr and the great gods have bound and handed over to the king these criminals who … broke the agreement; the ‘good will’ of the king caught them up”; ABL 350 r. 4 ff.: “since the treaty of the king, my lord, has caught them up, those who escaped the iron sword will die of hunger”, etc. (for more examples see CAD A/1, s.v. adû A and B). Note also LAS 133 r. 6 ff.: “The god said to me: If you will not tell, you will die !”

50 ABL 472, Babylonian, unsigned.

51 Cf. also LAS 133 r. 18 ff.: “Is it not written in the treaty as follows: ‘whoever hears something but does not speak out in the presence of the king’” (man-nu šá me-me-ni i-šam-mu-u-ni ina pa-an LUGAL la i-qa-bu-u-ni). A literal quotation from the Vassal-Treaties is found in ABL 1110+ Obv. 20–23 (cf. VTE 635–636 and 653–654). For more general references to the treaty in denunciations see ABL 555: 6′–8′, 1341: 6′ and 1404 r. 19 ff.; for denunciations without reference to the treaty see ABL 633, 1245, 1308, etc.

52 It is certain that at least the conspiracy of year 670 (cf. p. 34) was detected by the king's “eyes and ears”: see ABL 1031 + K.1034 + … + K.11021 and ABL 1217(+)K.13737, by Nabû-rēḫtu-uṣur. See also the anonymous denunciation published by Weidner, E., AfO 17 (1954–1956), 5 ffGoogle Scholar.

53 The entire reverse of the Zakūtu treaty (ABL 1239) is devoted to the information stipulations. See also ABL 129, from the time of Sargon II, and ABL 472: 1–2 (quoted above).

54 See ABL 1216 r. 1–10, translated most recently in AOAT 5/2, sub LAS 41. For a list of scholars sending regularly reports to the king, see ibid., Appendix 1A and B.

55 Translation of Oppenheim, A. L., Centaurus 14 (1969), 115CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For more relevant examples, see ibid.

56 Note that already Ptolemy (2nd century A.D.) had to devote large sections of the proem to his Tetrabiblos for answering the criticism raised against astrology in his times.

57 It is noteworthy that the treaty partners were conjured by names of two astral gods. The Vassal-Treaties were likewise concluded “before stars” (LAS 1 r. 18 f.) specified as Jupiter, Saturn, Venus, Mercury, Mars and Sirius in ll. 13–15 of the treaty text (i.e. the five classical planets and the most important of the fixed stars, the caniculum). Astral gods were invoked in other solemn oaths too (e.g., LAS 13), not to speak of blessings, benedictions, conjurations, etc. The nature and significance of the astral element in the religious thinking of Sargonid times has to my knowledge never been properly investigated and is therefore hardly correctly understood today.

58 VTE 123–127.

59 Col. ii 14 (CT 34, Pl. 48).

60 Recently summarized by Neate, G., “A Fragment from Kish with the Name of Aššur-nādinšumi”, Iraq 33 (1971), 54–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

61 For the post route leading from Nineveh to Babylon see LAS 294 r. 3 ff. It is to be assumed that this route was under the direct control of Šamaššumu-ukīn.

62 Cf. the respective frequencies of the relevant names in APN and NN.

63 See Babylonian Chronicle, Col. iv 14–15 (CT 34, Pl. 49). In this connection I would like to draw attention to ABL 756, a letter to Esarhaddon from “Kudurru, the son of Šamaš-ibni, the dead man whom the king brought back to life”. The letter must date from the time of Kudurru's stay in Nineveh, since it is written in Assyrian.

64 Taking into consideration what a privilege scribal schooling meant in those times, it is hard to see another reason why these exiled men would have been given this honour. For the son of the šandabakku cf. also K.1353 r. 3, DUMU lúGÚ.EN.NA šá a-kan-nu ka-lu-ú “the son of the š. who is kept arrested here (in Nineveh)” (AOAT 7, p. 158 f.), very probably referring to the same person.

65 Cf. ABL 326: 8 Išu-la-a lúGAR.KU šá DIL.BADkišá I.dGIŠ.ŠIR-MU-GI.NA ip-qi-du “Š., the commandant of Dilbat whom Šamaš-šumu-ukīn appointed”.

66 Cf. Borger, R., Ash., p. 53: 15f.Google Scholar: míta-bu-u-a tar-bit É.GAL AD-iá a-na LUGAL-u-ti UGU-šú-nu áš-kun-ma it-ti DINGIRmeš-šá a-na KUR-šá ú-tir-ši “I placed Tabū'a, a fosterling of my father's palace, to the kingship over them and returned her with her gods to her (home) country.” References to foreign princes taken as hostages to Nineveh and later returned to their countries are numerous, see e.g. Streck, M., Asb., p. 18 fGoogle Scholar. Note also ABL 918, a letter from Esarhaddon to the Elamite king Urtaku which shows that the kings had exchanged children as hostages in order to secure peace between their countries (the letter begins: “A tablet of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, to Urtaku, king of Elam: I am well, your sons and daughters are well, my country and my magnates are well. May Urtaku, king of Elam, my brother, be well, may my sons and daughters be well, may your magnates and your country be well! ”).

67 According to the New English Bible (Oxford and Cambridge, 1970)Google Scholar.

68 See BM 25091 r. 4 (S. Smith, BHT, Pl. I–III); CT 34, Pl. 45 iv 8–9 and Pl. 50 iv 29.

69 This conspiracy is, excepting the Chronicle, attested only in letters. For a list and discussion of the pertinent texts see AOAT 5/2, commentary on LAS 247.